Divinity 2 - Ego Draconis Unveiled?

Whatīs been there?
Just a few barren lines in a bigger press release on golem.de that dtp had signed some Belgian studio for developing an RPG.
Do you know the whole Belgian market and its players?
Could have been anyone.

Everybody had this. But there was another source linking dtp and Larian.

Bragger!

You should have believed it!

P.S.: Another question:
Why didnīt you make it an official news bit here back then!?

Because the combination of sources was only 99.99% certain. We knew dtp and Larian were negotiating, and had signed a LOI, if I remember correctly. Then came that Belgian studio announcement. It was clear it was Divinity 2. But there was no actual proof to show. We would have pissed off Larian and dtp with such a newsbit, which isnīt our style. Maybe we would have made it official and asked them for their official "no comment" if we have had something quotable.
Thatīs why we didnīt post it as news and only let you guys know whatīs going on.
If you need more than that you should really wait for magazine coverage. Which can take some time, as you have seen.

Originally Posted by Ragon der Magier
I only saw a big bad black whole of information for several years.

Hole, not whole, Ragon.

@Gorath: In the stock business, that is called "insider knowledge".

To defend Ragon, I think he's still right insofar that there was no real source one could nail down - and as long as there isn't I at least consider everything a "rumor", no matter how hard you try to fight this word.

You just can't say "I know it's true and I'm right", because every liar would be able to tell the same.
Not to mention those who just place a "rumor" into the public to gain attention (in the sense of an "attention whore") - a "rumor" which is fake and just made up in order to gain attention to the one who posted it in the first place.

WE ar the original readers, we simply aren't able to distinguish between rumor and truth - what is false and what is right.

The way you put it, Gorath, makes it sound rather self-righteous, because you do as if we were only blind worms who do not know the Divine Truth.

Simply because we know fewer things than you do - which puts you into a position of "information power" or "information might".

—  Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius  and a lot of courage  to move in the opposite direction. (E.F.Schumacher, Economist, Source)

Not really, because the source was publically available at that time. Maybe it still is, I donīt know.

To defend Ragon, I think he's still right insofar that there was no real source one could nail down - and as long as there isn't I at least consider everything a "rumor", no matter how hard you try to fight this word.

Sure. Itīs a matter of standards. You can either say 99.99% are enough or you say I demand 100%. In that case you need a lot of patience.
I personally donīt consider computer games important enough to wait years for verified infos.
Iīm not attacking Ragon. Just harmless fun.

You just can't say "I know it's true and I'm right", because every liar would be able to tell the same.
Not to mention those who just place a "rumor" into the public to gain attention (in the sense of an "attention whore") - a "rumor" which is fake and just made up in order to gain attention to the one who posted it in the first place.

I never lie!

WE ar the original readers, we simply aren't able to distinguish between rumor and truth - what is false and what is right.

Correct. And we as editors arenīt always able (or willing) to tell you everything. Then you have to decide if you want to believe it or not. The easy way would have been right in this case.

The way you put it, Gorath, makes it sound rather self-righteous, because you do as if we were only blind worms who do not know the Divine Truth.

Simply because we know fewer things than you do - which puts you into a position of "information power" or "information might".

No, itīs just harmless but quite enjoyable Schadenfreude. Some of you did look the gift horse in the mouth. And now you have to suffer a little teasing.

Originally Posted by txa1265
Ego is "I" or "self" and Draconis is a constellation as well as having Dragon implications. My brain keeps going to 'I of the Dragon' … but that isn't a good place to go

Draconis is the genitive form of "draco" (in Latin -IIRC- it should be: draco (nominative form), draconis (genitive form), draconi (dative form), draconem (accusative form), draconi (ablative form)).
So since draconis is genitive, possible translations could include "The self of the dragon", "The ego of the dragon", "The dragon's self" etc.

So since draconis is genitive, possible translations could include "The self of the dragon", "The ego of the dragon", "The dragon's self" etc.

I don't think 'ego' is ever used as a noun in Latin; this is modern usage (presumably due to Freud). "The dragon's self", back-translated into Latin, would rather come out as something like "anima draconis". Therefore, I would indeed favor "I of the Dragon" as a translation.

Then again, whoever came up with the title might not have been a Cicero either.

And I now believe that it has to do with this shapeshifting into a Dragon I read once mentioned …

—  Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius  and a lot of courage  to move in the opposite direction. (E.F.Schumacher, Economist, Source)

When "I" is used as a precurser to a person of distinction say as in "I Claudius" (the TV series) it kind of suggests "from or of myself" similar to a self or secret biography.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I,_Claudius

"Draconis" is - in my eyes - just referring to the species or race of Dragons.

If I said "Ego Humanis", would this be clearer ?

It's just (pseudo-)Latin-based.

—  Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius  and a lot of courage  to move in the opposite direction. (E.F.Schumacher, Economist, Source)

I would rather say "The dragon-like self" then the other way round.
Or is "dragonish" a word?
A free but less cheesy translation might be "Dragon Soul" - goes well with the dragon shapeshifting idea, I guess.

—  Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius  and a lot of courage  to move in the opposite direction. (E.F.Schumacher, Economist, Source)

I notice that in the German-language part of the Larian forum everyone seews that it sounds somewhat (pseudo-)Latin-like.
There is no such discussion because everyone seems to understand what is meant.

Of course, the title isn't perfect, but I've seen far worse.

—  Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius  and a lot of courage  to move in the opposite direction. (E.F.Schumacher, Economist, Source)